Ethical issues in the forensic applications of DNA analysis

Abstract

Attitudes towards forensic applications of DNA analysis vary. But two archetypal opposed viewpoints may be constructed—“Camp Enthusiastic” and “Camp Hostile”. Section 2characterises these two camps and analyses their opposition as reflecting (i) different models of criminal justice and different views in ethical theory about the normative relationship between the individual and society; or (ii) the agenda of different social or political interest groups in society. It is argued that explaining the dispute as a socio–political one, rather than as a disagreement in ethical theory, merely serves to shift the focus of ethical interest or concern from forensic applications of DNA analysis, as such, to their socio–political context, compelling a focus on the ethics of the adversarial system of justice in particular. Section 3presents an approach to adjudicating the dispute between the two Camps. It is argued that commitment to human rights logically entails commitment to the Principle of Generic Consistency (PGC) of the American Philosopher Alan Gewirth. Consequently, the European Convention on Human Rights, which is binding on all European States, must be interpreted in line with the PGC. The PGC is explained and it is argued that it supports the Due Process Model of Criminal Justice (characteristic of Camp Hostile) over the Crime Control Model (characteristic of Camp Enthusiastic).